Co-located Heroin Assisted Treatment within primary care: A preliminary analysis of the implications for healthcare access, cost, and treatment delivery in the UK.

BACKGROUND: The UK is experiencing its highest rate of drug related deaths in 25 years. Poor and inconsistent access to healthcare negatively impacts health outcomes for people who use drugs. Innovation in models of care which promote access and availability of physical treatment is fundamental. Heroin Assisted Treatment (HAT) is a treatment modality targeted at the most marginalised people who use drugs, at high risk of mortality and morbidity. The first service-provider initiated HAT service in the UK ran between October 2019 and November 2022 in Middlesbrough, England. The service was co-located within a specialist primary care facility offering acute healthcare treatment alongside injectable diamorphine. METHODS: Analysis of anonymised health records for healthcare costs (not including drug treatment) took place using descriptive statistics prior and during engagement with HAT, at both three (n=15) and six (n=12) months. Primary outcome measures were incidents of wound care, skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs), overdose (OD) events, unplanned overnight stays in hospital, treatment engagement (general and within hospital care settings) and ambulance incidents. Secondary outcome measures were costs associated with these events. RESULTS: A shift in healthcare access for participants during HAT engagement was observed. HAT service attendance appeared to support health promoting preventative care, and reduce reactive reliance on emergency healthcare systems. At three and six months, engagement for preventative wound care and treatment for SSTIs increased at the practice. Unplanned emergency healthcare interactions for ODs, overnight hospital stays, serious SSTIs, and ambulance incidents reduced, and there was an increase in treatment engagement (i.e. a reduction in appointments which were not engaged with). There was a decrease in treatment engagement in hospital settings. Changes in healthcare utilisation during HAT translated to a reduction in healthcare costs of 58% within six months compared to the same timeframe from the period directly prior to commencing HAT. CONCLUSION: This exploratory study highlights the potential for innovative harm reduction interventions such as HAT, co-located with primary care services, to improve healthcare access and engagement for a high-risk population. Increased uptake of primary healthcare services translated to reductions in emergency healthcare use and associated costs. Although costs of HAT provision are substantial, the notable cost-savings in health care should be an important consideration in service implementation planning.

Safe inhalation pipe provision (SIPP): protocol for a mixed-method evaluation of an intervention to improve health outcomes and service engagement among people who use crack cocaine in England.

BACKGROUND: Over 180,000 people use crack cocaine in England, yet provision of smoking equipment to support safer crack use is prohibited under UK law. Pipes used for crack cocaine smoking are often homemade and/or in short supply, leading to pipe sharing and injuries from use of unsafe materials. This increases risk of viral infection and respiratory harm among a marginalised underserved population. International evaluations suggest crack pipe supply leads to sustained reductions in pipe sharing and use of homemade equipment; increased health risk awareness; improved service access; reduction in injecting and crack-related health problems. In this paper, we introduce the protocol for the NIHR-funded SIPP (Safe inhalation pipe provision) project and discuss implications for impact. METHODS: The SIPP study will develop, implement and evaluate a crack smoking equipment and training intervention to be distributed through peer networks and specialist drug services in England. Study components comprise: (1) peer-network capacity building and co-production; (2) a pre- and post-intervention survey at intervention and non-equivalent control sites; (3) a mixed-method process evaluation; and (4) an economic evaluation. Participant eligibility criteria are use of crack within the past 28 days, with a survey sample of ~ 740 for each impact evaluation survey point and ~ 40 for qualitative process evaluation interviews. Our primary outcome measure is pipe sharing within the past 28 days, with secondary outcomes pertaining to use of homemade pipes, service engagement, injecting practice and acute health harms. ANTICIPATED IMPACT: SIPP aims to reduce crack use risk practices and associated health harms; including through increasing crack harm reduction awareness among service providers and peers. Implementation has only been possible with local police approvals. Our goal is to generate an evidence base to inform review of the legislation prohibiting crack pipe supply in the UK. This holds potential to transform harm reduction service provision and engagement nationally. CONCLUSION: People who smoke crack cocaine in England currently have little reason to engage with harm reduction and drug services. Little is known about this growing population. This study will provide insight into population characteristics, unmet need and the case for legislative reform. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN12541454  https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN12541454.

Navigating Chemical Toxicity in Coca Production in the Colombian Borderlands of Putumayo.

In Putumayo, a jungle borderland in southern Colombia, thousands of farmers derive their livelihood from the cultivation and processing of coca leaf, exposing themselves to fertilizers, pesticides, and other toxic chemicals on a daily basis. In this article, we show how the coca growers' relationship with chemicals and the health risks to which they are exposed, are politically and institutionally structured. We discuss the specific impact of anti-narcotics policy in a broader context of deep inequalities and document the emergent and adaptive day-to-day attempts of the farmers to navigate the structural risk environment.

Caring for coca, living with chemicals: Towards ecological harm reduction.

In this paper, we show how the materialisation of chemical harms linked to the cultivation of coca and its processing into coca paste reside in a wider politics of structural violence which is also situated ecologically. Drawing on the qualitative interview accounts of coca farmers in Putumayo, Colombia, we attend to practices of care in the field and in the laboratory. We look first at chemicals used in coca's cultivation (herbicides, fertilizers, pesticides), and second at chemicals (such as sulphuric acid, sodium carbonate, magnesium permanganate) used in the processing of coca leaf into paste (before the paste is sold on for refinement into cocaine). Our analysis highlights the tensions which inevitably arise in the balance and multiplicities of care - for crops, livelihood, and environment. We trace how farmers' narratives of the neutralisation of chemical risks habituate chemical harms as mundane, even uneventful, in an economic imperative to 'carry on as normal' in the coca economy. We emphasise health and harm as matters of care which not only affect humans but living environments. Accounts of 'risk environment' can give insufficient attention to Nature, and this leads us to consider 'ecological harm reduction'.

Development, acceptability and feasibility of a personalised, behavioural intervention to prevent bacterial skin and soft tissue infections among people who inject drugs: a mixed-methods Person-Based Approach study.

BACKGROUND: Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTI) among people who inject drugs (PWID) are a public health concern. This study aimed to co-produce and assess the acceptability and feasibility of a behavioural intervention to prevent SSTI. METHODS: The Person-Based Approach (PBA) was followed which involves: (i) collating and analysing evidence; (ii) developing guiding principles; (iii) a behavioural analysis; (iv) logic model development; and (v) designing and refining intervention materials. Co-production activities with target group representatives and key collaborators obtained feedback on the intervention which was used to refine its design and content. The intervention, harm reduction advice cards to support conversation between service provider and PWID and resources to support safer injecting practice, was piloted with 13 PWID by four service providers in Bristol and evaluated using a mixed-methods approach. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 11 PWID and four service providers. Questionnaires completed by all PWID recorded demographic characteristics, SSTI, drug use and treatment history. Interviews were analysed thematically and questionnaires were analysed descriptively. RESULTS: Published literature highlighted structural barriers to safer injecting practices, such as access to hygienic injecting environments and injecting practices associated with SSTI included: limited handwashing/injection-site swabbing and use of too much acidifier to dissolve drugs. Co-production activities and the literature indicated vein care and minimisation of pain as PWID priorities. The importance of service provider-client relationships and non-stigmatising delivery was highlighted through the co-production work. Providing practical resources was identified as important to address environmental constraints to safer injecting practices. Most participants receiving the intervention were White British, male, had a history of SSTI and on average were 43.6 years old and had injected for 22.7 years. The intervention was well-received by PWID and service providers. Intervention content and materials given out to support harm reduction were viewed positively. The intervention appeared to support reflections on and intentions to change injecting behaviours, though barriers to safer injecting practice remained prominent. CONCLUSIONS: The PBA ensured the intervention aligned to the priorities of PWID. It was viewed as acceptable and mostly feasible to PWID and service providers and has transferability promise. Further implementation alongside broader harm reduction interventions is needed.

'This is hardcore': a qualitative study exploring service users' experiences of Heroin-Assisted Treatment (HAT) in Middlesbrough, England.

BACKGROUND: Heroin-Assisted Treatment (HAT) is well evidenced internationally to improve health and social outcomes for people dependent on opioids who have not been helped by traditional treatment options. Despite this evidence base, England has been slow to implement HAT. The first service outside of a trial setting opened in 2019, providing twice-daily supervised injections of medical-grade heroin (diamorphine) to a select sample of high-risk heroin users in Middlesbrough. This paper explores their experiences, including the negotiation of the strict regularly controls required of a novel intervention in the UK context. METHODS: We conducted in-depth interviews with service providers and users of the Middlesbrough HAT service between September and November 2021. Data from each group were thematically analysed and reported separately. This paper details the experiences of the twelve heroin dependent men and women accessing HAT. RESULTS: Participants' accounts of HAT treatment evidenced a tension between the regulatory constraints and uncertainty of treatment provision, and the positive outcomes experienced through supportive service provision and an injectable treatment option. Limited confidence was held in treatment efficacy, longevity of funding, and personal capacity for treatment success. This was counteracted by a strong motivation to cease engagement with the illicit drug market. While attendance requirements placed restrictions on daily activities, participants also experienced benefits from strong, supportive bonds built with the service providers through their continued engagement. CONCLUSIONS: The Middlesbrough HAT programme provided benefits to a high-risk population of opioid dependent people who were unable or disinclined to participate in conventional opioid substitution treatments. The findings in this paper highlight the potential for service modifications to further enhance engagement. The closure of this programme in 2022 prohibits this opportunity for the Middlesbrough community, but holds potential to inform advocacy and innovation for future HAT interventions in England.

Social and structural determinants of injection drug use-associated bacterial and fungal infections: A qualitative systematic review and thematic synthesis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Injection drug use-associated bacterial and fungal infections are increasingly common, and social contexts shape individuals' injecting practices and treatment experiences. We sought to synthesize qualitative studies of social-structural factors influencing incidence and treatment of injecting-related infections. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL and PsycINFO from 1 January 2000 to 18 February 2021. Informed by Rhodes' 'risk environment' framework, we performed thematic synthesis in three stages: (1) line-by-line coding; (2) organizing codes into descriptive themes, reflecting interpretations of study authors; and (3) consolidating descriptive themes into conceptual categories to identify higher-order analytical themes. RESULTS: We screened 4841 abstracts and included 26 qualitative studies on experiences of injecting-related bacterial and fungal infections. We identified six descriptive themes organized into two analytical themes. The first analytical theme, social production of risk, considered macro-environmental influences. Four descriptive themes highlighted pathways through which this occurs: (1) unregulated drug supply, leading to poor drug quality and solubility; (2) unsafe spaces, influenced by policing practices and insecure housing; (3) health-care policies and practices, leading to negative experiences that discourage access to care; and (4) restrictions on harm reduction programmes, including structural barriers to effective service provision. The second analytical theme, practices of care among people who use drugs, addressed protective strategies that people employ within infection risk environments. Associated descriptive themes were: (5) mutual care, including assisted-injecting and sharing sterile equipment; and (6) self-care, including vein health and self-treatment. Within constraining risk environments, some protective strategies for bacterial infections precipitated other health risks (e.g. HIV transmission). CONCLUSIONS: Injecting-related bacterial and fungal infections are shaped by modifiable social-structural factors, including poor quality unregulated drugs, criminalization and policing enforcement, insufficient housing, limited harm reduction services and harmful health-care practices. People who inject drugs navigate these barriers while attempting to protect themselves and their community.

More than just 'free heroin': Caring whilst navigating constraint in the delivery of diamorphine assisted treatment.

BACKGROUND: In 2020, drug related deaths in the United Kingdom (UK) reached the highest rate in over 25 years, with hospitalisations and deaths particularly impacting people who use illicit opioids such as heroin. Treatment systems are increasingly required to be innovative to engage the most vulnerable at risk from premature morbidity and mortality. Heroin Assisted Treatment (HAT) is an alternative treatment modality for people for whom more traditional forms of opioid substitution therapy, such as methadone, have been ineffective. Middlesbrough, a town in the North-East England, was home to the first service in the UK to implement HAT outside of a clinical trial setting which closed for operation in November 2022. METHODS: Qualitative in-depth interviews with patients and health care providers (n =17) involved in the delivery of HAT were undertaken during 2021. This paper focuses on the health care provider interviews, the majority of which took place remotely. Interviews were audio recorded and thematically analysed. RESULTS: Health care providers navigated multiple layers of constraint during HAT implementation and delivery. We explore this in relation to three themes: 1) Negotiating risk and safety within treatment 2) More than a prescription: care beyond diamorphine 3) Internal and external delivery barriers and impact on treatment acceptability, identity and longevity. Negotiating and managing risks of polysubstance use was a complex task. Benefits regarding access to holistic care, improved therapeutic and social relationships were recognised by practitioners. The rigorous delivery schedule was the biggest barrier to engagement. Outside the treatment room, socio-structural factors posed additional challenges. CONCLUSION: Despite some operational complexities, health care providers viewed HAT as an effective method of engaging a high risk population with drug treatment services, with holistic benefits for clients over and above the treatment of opioid dependency. Findings will inform advocacy and innovation for future HAT interventions in England.

Opioid-related deaths during hospital admissions or shortly after discharge in the United Kingdom: A thematic framework analysis of coroner reports.

BACKGROUND: People who use heroin and other illicit opioids are at high risk of fatal overdose in the days after hospital discharge, but the reasons for this risk have not been studied. METHODS: We used the National Programme on Substance Abuse Deaths, a database of coroner reports for deaths following psychoactive drug use in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. We selected reports where the death occurred between 2010 and 2021, an opioid was detected in toxicology testing, the death was related to nonmedical opioid use, and death was either during an acute medical or psychiatric hospital admission or within 14 days after discharge. We used thematic framework analysis of factors that may contribute to the risk of death during hospital admission or after discharge. RESULTS: We identified 121 coroners' reports; 42 where a patient died after using drugs during hospital admission, and 79 where death occurred shortly after discharge. The median age at death was 40 (IQR 34-46); 88 (73%) were male; and sedatives additional to opioids were detected at postmortem in 88 cases (73%), most commonly benzodiazepines. In thematic framework analysis, we categorised potential causes of fatal opioid overdose into three areas: (a) hospital policies and actions. Zero-tolerance policies mean that patients conceal drug use and use drugs in unsafe places such as locked bathrooms. Patients may be discharged to locations such as temporary hostels or the street while recovering. Some patients bring their own medicines or illicit opioids due to expectations of low-quality care, including undertreated withdrawal or pain; (b) high-risk use of sedatives. People may increase sedative use to manage symptoms of acute illness or a mental health crisis, and some may lose tolerance to opioids during a hospital admission; (c) declining health. Physical health and mobility problems posed barriers to post-discharge treatment for substance use, and some patients had sudden deteriorations in health that may have contributed to respiratory depression. CONCLUSION: Hospital admissions are associated with acute health crises that increase the risk of fatal overdose for patients who use illicit opioids. Hospitals need guidance to help them care for this patient group, particularly in relation to withdrawal management, harm reduction interventions such as take-home naloxone, discharge planning including continuation of opioid agonist therapy during recovery, management of poly-sedative use, and access to palliative care.

Opioid Injection-Associated Bacterial Infections in England, 2002-2021: A Time Series Analysis of Seasonal Variation and the Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019.

BACKGROUND: Bacterial infections cause substantial pain and disability among people who inject drugs. We described time trends in hospital admissions for injecting-related infections in England. METHODS: We analyzed hospital admissions in England between January 2002 and December 2021. We included patients with infections commonly caused by drug injection, including cutaneous abscesses, cellulitis, endocarditis, or osteomyelitis, and a diagnosis of opioid use disorder. We used Poisson regression to estimate seasonal variation and changes associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) response. RESULTS: There were 92 303 hospital admissions for injection-associated infections between 2002 and 2021. Eighty-seven percent were skin, soft-tissue, or vascular infections; 72% of patients were male; and the median age increased from 31 years in 2002 to 42 years in 2021. The rate of admissions reduced from 13.97 per day (95% confidence interval [CI], 13.59-14.36) in 2003 to 8.94 (95% CI, 8.64-9.25) in 2011, then increased to 18.91 (95% CI, 18.46-19.36) in 2019. At the introduction of COVID-19 response in March 2020, the rate of injection-associated infections reduced by 35.3% (95% CI, 32.1-38.4). Injection-associated infections were also seasonal; the rate was 1.21 (95% CI, 1.18-1.24) times higher in July than in February. CONCLUSIONS: This incidence of opioid injection-associated infections varies within years and reduced following COVID-19 response measures. This suggests that social and structural factors such as housing and the degree of social mixing may contribute to the risk of infection, supporting investment in improved social conditions for this population as a means to reduce the burden of injecting-related infections.

Precarious Lives, Precarious Treatments: Making Drug Treatment Work in Northern Myanmar.

We explore how precarious livelihoods intersect with precarious treatments for heroin dependency in a setting affected by longstanding conflicts and an illicit drug economy as well as by recent events of pandemic and political change. Working with 33 qualitative interviews with people who inject drugs in Kachin State, northern Myanmar, we explore how drug dependency treatment, especially methadone substitution, is made to work in efforts to sustain everyday livelihoods. Our analysis attends to the work that is done to enable therapeutic trajectories to emerge as "generous constraints" in precarity. We trace methadone substitution as an emergent intervention of livelihood survival.

Analysis of the UK Government's 10-Year Drugs Strategy-a resource for practitioners and policymakers.

In 2021, during a drug-related death crisis in the UK, the Government published its ten-year drugs strategy. This article, written in collaboration with the Faculty of Public Health and the Association of Directors of Public Health, assesses whether this Strategy is evidence-based and consistent with international calls to promote public health approaches to drugs, which put 'people, health and human rights at the centre'. Elements of the Strategy are welcome, including the promise of significant funding for drug treatment services, the effects of which will depend on how it is utilized by services and local commissioners and whether it is sustained. However, unevidenced and harmful measures to deter drug use by means of punishment continue to be promoted, which will have deleterious impacts on people who use drugs. An effective public health approach to drugs should tackle population-level risk factors, which may predispose to harmful patterns of drug use, including adverse childhood experiences and socioeconomic deprivation, and institute evidence-based measures to mitigate drug-related harm. This would likely be more effective, and just, than the continuation of policies rooted in enforcement. A more dramatic re-orientation of UK drug policy than that offered by the Strategy is overdue.

"It's too hard" - the management of latent TB in under-served populations in the UK: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: UK national guidance recommends systematic screening for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) in under-served populations, including people experiencing homelessness and people who use drugs. This is not routinely implemented in the UK, and the reasons for this policy-practice mismatch remain underexplored. METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 19 healthcare professionals from across the UK. Participants were recruited using purposive sampling and snowballing, identifying individuals with excellent knowledge of their regions practice and policy of LTBI management. The interviews were conducted online, and were audio recorded, with transcripts thematically analysed using a two-stage inductive coding process to explore perceived barriers and enablers to LTBI screening. RESULTS: Most participants had previous experience managing LTBI in under-served populations, but none were conducting systematic screening as per national guidance. We identified service provision challenges and low prioritisation of LTBI as the key explanatory themes driving this policy-practice mismatch. Lack of resource, and the complexity of clinical decision making were two key service level barriers. System and service inertia, and lack of cost effectiveness evidence led to LTBI being deprioritised. Service integration and promotion of WHO targets for TB elimination were highlighted as potential solutions. CONCLUSION: Integrating LTBI testing and treatment with existing health services for under-served populations could improve feasibility and efficacy. Promotion of UK TB elimination goals and generation of regional evidence to support commissioning for LTBI care is vital. Without such a multi-pronged approach inertia is likely to persist and the zeitgeist will remain: "it's too hard".

Hospital policies can create barriers to good management of opioid withdrawal.

The studyHarris M, Holland A, Lewer D, et al. Barriers to management of opioid withdrawal in hospitals in England: a document analysis of hospital policies on the management of substance dependence. BMC Med 2022;20:151.To read the full NIHR Alert, go to: https://evidence.nihr.ac.uk/alert/many-hospital-policies-create-barriers-to-good-management-of-opioid-withdrawal/.

The United Kingdom's first unsanctioned overdose prevention site; A proof-of-concept evaluation.

BACKGROUND: The United Kingdom (UK) is currently experiencing a public health crisis of drug-related deaths. The government has rejected recommendations to open overdose prevention services, under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. To report on the operation and use of an unsanctioned overdose prevention service which operated in Glasgow city centre from September 2020 to May 2021. METHODS: Description of the service, with analysis of data collected on its use. RESULTS: The service operated for nine months without permission or funding from official sources. We report on the 894 injections supervised and recorded, and nine successful interventions with overdose events (seven opioid/two cocaine). Powder cocaine injection predominated either alone (60.6%) or with heroin (22.1%). Injection was mostly in the groin (68.0%) or arm (16.8%). More injections were recorded by males (70.1%). Around 65% of injection events featured an individual who was on a buprenorphine/methadone prescription. CONCLUSION: It is feasible for an overdose prevention service to operate successfully in the UK without being shut down by the police or with negative consequences for the community. Future sites in the UK must tailor to the substances used by their potential clients, international trends (e.g. for fentanyl use) did not apply here. There is an urgent need and demand for these services in the UK to reduce harm, prevent and intervene during overdose, and provide vital psychosocial support for health and wellbeing in a highly marginalised population.

Barriers to management of opioid withdrawal in hospitals in England: a document analysis of hospital policies on the management of substance dependence.

BACKGROUND: People who use illicit opioids are more likely to be admitted to hospital than people of the same age in the general population. Many admissions end in discharge against medical advice, which is associated with readmission and all-cause mortality. Opioid withdrawal contributes to premature discharge. We sought to understand the barriers to timely provision of opioid substitution therapy (OST), which helps to prevent opioid withdrawal, in acute hospitals in England. METHODS: We requested policies on substance dependence management from 135 National Health Service trusts, which manage acute hospitals in England, and conducted a document content analysis. Additionally, we reviewed an Omitted and Delayed Medicines Tool (ODMT), one resource used to inform critical medicine categorisation in England. We worked closely with people with lived experience of OST and/or illicit opioid use, informed by principles of community-based participatory research. RESULTS: Eighty-six (64%) trusts provided 101 relevant policies. An additional 44 (33%) responded but could not provide relevant policies, and five (4%) did not send a definitive response. Policies illustrate procedural barriers to OST provision, including inconsistent application of national guidelines across trusts. Continuing community OST prescriptions for people admitted in the evening, night-time, or weekend was often precluded by requirements to confirm doses with organisations that were closed during these hours. 42/101 trusts (42%) required or recommended a urine drug test positive for OST medications or opioids prior to OST prescription. The language used in many policies was stigmatising and characterised people who use drugs as untrustworthy. OST was not specifically mentioned in the reviewed ODMT, with 'drugs used in substance dependence' collectively categorised as posing low risk if delayed and moderate risk if omitted. CONCLUSIONS: Many hospitals in England have policies that likely prevent timely and effective OST. This was underpinned by the 'low-risk' categorisation of OST delay in the ODMT. Delays to continuity of OST between community and hospital settings may contribute to inpatient opioid withdrawal and increase the risk of discharge against medical advice. Acute hospitals in England require standardised best practice policies that account for the needs of this patient group.